Eco-activists’ claims that they have a right to cause damage as part of their protests have been rejected by Court of Appeal judges.
The Attorney General Victoria Prentis asked the Court to rule on whether eco-protesters can use a defence of “lawful excuse” to cause criminal damage to banks, businesses and private property and avoid conviction at trial.
It follows the acquittal of a protester from a climate action group known as Burning Pink who threw paint at the offices of Greenpeace, Amnesty International, Christian Aid, Friends of the Earth, Conservative party, Labour, LibDems and Green party, causing more than £36,000 worth of damage.
She was cleared after claiming that she honestly believed that the owners of the damaged property would have consented to it if it had known more about the impact of climate change.
However, on Monday three court of appeal judges ruled that protesters cannot use such a defence as political beliefs were “too remote” to be classed as a “lawful excuse”.
The Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr, Lord Justice William Davis and Mr Justice Garnham ruled on Monday that “circumstances” could include the “time, place and extent” of the damage, but not the reasons behind a protest.
Giving a summary of the judgment, Baroness Carr said: “The circumstances would not include the political or philosophical beliefs of the person causing the damage.
“They would not include the reasoning or wider motivations for the damage. These matters are too remote from the damage. Evidence from the defendant about the facts of or effects of climate change would be inadmissible.”